[anonsec] Re: potential new IETF WG on anonymous IPSec (fwd from hal at finney.org) (fwd from touch at ISI.EDU)

[Ian Grigg]

Steven M. Bellovin wrote:

> For RFCs, there are two paths.  If the topic is general enough (and, of 
> course, the advice is good enough), Russ Housley or I would consider 
> sponsoring the document as a BCP.  If it's narrow or we're not 
> interested for some reason (other than quality, of course), it could be 
> an individual submission.  I encourage both paths.

It sounds like an RFC / BCP would be a good target.
I suspect given the controversy over a lot of these
ideas an intermediate phase would be needed where
the controversy could be aired in depth, before being
summarised into a BCP.

 From that pov, a wiki + discussion list leading to a
BCP would seem like a good idea.

Alternatively, let all these things be thrown into
the mixing pot and see what happens?

iang

---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo at metzdowd.com